Incorrect pycryptopp architecture selected on osx 10.6. #1006

Closed
opened 2010-03-27 18:34:24 +00:00 by nejucomo · 5 comments

My osx 10.6 box has python2.6 and an Intel Core 2 Duo, yet when I follow the installation instructions, it appears that the pycryptopp egg is for the wrong version of python, and perhaps the wrong instruction set.

exceptions.ImportError: /Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/pycryptopp-0.5.17-py2.5-macosx-10.6-fat.egg/pycryptopp/_pycryptopp.so: no appropriate 64-bit architecture (see "man python" for running in 32-bit mode)

Notice it refers to "py2.5" inside the 2.6 site-packages directory.

Attached full install and unittest logs.

My osx 10.6 box has python2.6 and an Intel Core 2 Duo, yet when I follow the installation instructions, it appears that the pycryptopp egg is for the wrong version of python, and perhaps the wrong instruction set. ``` exceptions.ImportError: /Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/pycryptopp-0.5.17-py2.5-macosx-10.6-fat.egg/pycryptopp/_pycryptopp.so: no appropriate 64-bit architecture (see "man python" for running in 32-bit mode) ``` Notice it refers to "py2.5" inside the 2.6 site-packages directory. Attached full install and unittest logs.
nejucomo added the
packaging
major
defect
1.6.1
labels 2010-03-27 18:34:24 +00:00
nejucomo added this to the undecided milestone 2010-03-27 18:34:24 +00:00
Author

Attachment tahoe-lafs-1.6.1.build.log (30227 bytes) added

build log

**Attachment** tahoe-lafs-1.6.1.build.log (30227 bytes) added build log
Author

Attachment tahoe-lafs-1.6.1.test.log (64420 bytes) added

test log

**Attachment** tahoe-lafs-1.6.1.test.log (64420 bytes) added test log
Author

Notice, #1005 also refers to the same commands and output. The first exception in the test output is a twisted problem documented in #1005 and is not related to this issue.

Notice, #1005 also refers to the same commands and output. The first exception in the test output is a twisted problem documented in #1005 and is not related to this issue.
tahoe-lafs modified the milestone from undecided to 1.7.0 2010-03-29 00:16:57 +00:00
zooko modified the milestone from 1.7.0 to eventually 2010-04-12 17:34:37 +00:00

I would like to investigate this, but I already have a full load of other Tahoe-LAFS tickets for v1.7.0 Milestone. If anyone else wants to help out that would be great.

I would like to investigate this, but I already have a full load of other Tahoe-LAFS tickets for v1.7.0 Milestone. If anyone else wants to help out that would be great.

I suspect this was a bug in older versions of Mac OS X tools, the version of Python that came with Mac OS X, etc. I'm closing this on the assumption that it is no longer relevant, and someone will need to re-open it if it recurs.

I suspect this was a bug in older versions of Mac OS X tools, the version of Python that came with Mac OS X, etc. I'm closing this on the assumption that it is no longer relevant, and someone will need to re-open it if it recurs.
zooko added the
wontfix
label 2014-09-25 15:54:01 +00:00
zooko closed this issue 2014-09-25 15:54:01 +00:00
tahoe-lafs removed the
wontfix
label 2014-09-25 16:02:12 +00:00
tahoe-lafs added the
cannot reproduce
label 2014-09-25 16:02:25 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Milestone
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Reference: tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25#1006
No description provided.